Gear of the Year: Richard's choice - Fujifilm X-T2

If 2016 has made one thing very clear it’s that not everyone agrees with one another about what is logically sound. Indeed there’s been a considerable trend towards questioning the very value of expertise and facts. So perhaps it’s fitting that my camera of the year wasn’t chosen with the logical, dispassionate approach that is often necessary for my job.

I just chose the one I enjoyed the most.

If technical capability alone were my primary consideration, the Nikon D500 makes a strong case. Its autofocus is jaw-dropping, even compared with top-end sports cameras and its ergonomics are amongst the best I've encountered. The Sony a6300 is technically impressive, too, and I loved the video footage I got out of it (though it helped that I shot a series of short clips, so never encountered the temperature limitations that have got parts of the Internet so hot and bothered).

But my product of the year is, without question, the Fujifilm X-T2. Not because it’s unquestionably better (it isn’t), but because it’s the camera the most made me want to get out and shoot, this year.

Completing the picture

Maybe it’s a question of delayed gratification. I loved a lot about the X-Pro2 when I reviewed it at the beginning of the year, not least the image quality. I also really enjoyed shooting on a system with a good range of prime lenses for the APS-C format, rather than one that, through omission, tries to push me into buying a different format.

But that experience didn’t prepare me for just how good the X-T2 was going to be. Looking back, the X-Pro2 gave hints at the video and autofocus improvements Fujifilm had made, but the full impact didn’t really hit me until I got to spend some time shooting with the X-T2, which gives a little more control and flexibility to both.

With the X-T2 it feels like all the pieces have come together: a camera that captures beautiful color with ergonomics I enjoy that can shoot pretty much anything I point it at, without me ever feeling I'm working around its shortcomings. And, as a bonus, that will produce excellent footage when I come up with an idea for a short film, rather than a series of stills. Having something like that sitting in your desk is tremendous encouragement to go out and shoot.

Projects like this video, for instance, shot by some friends and I using the X-T2, battery grip and BlackMagic Video Assist:

Parts of the video were shot in F-Log and graded with the help of the color correction profile (LUT) that the company provides, which gives a hint about how much thought has gone into the T2's video capabilities. The battery grip improves the battery/heat management for video shooting, though in near 0°C (32°F) conditions, overheating was the least of our problems. I'll admit that I like the camera less if I have to operate it with gloves on.

A question of style

And, before you think I’ve just been bewitched by the X-T2’s retro looks and handling, I should make clear that, while I think it’s an attractive camera, my reason for enjoying the X-T2 isn't that I believe camera ergonomics reached their zenith in 1987. For instance I don't, personally, find the dedicated shutter speed dial especially useful: locking it to ‘A’ for most stills shooting and having to set to 1/60th then spin the rear dial one notch to shoot video at 1/50th of a second.

"I find it as quick and easy to use as the most polished contemporary DSLR"

However, between the AF point joystick, large, well-placed exposure comp dial, lenses with aperture rings and enough custom buttons to give me access to the settings I change most often, I find the X-T2 as quick and easy to use as the most polished contemporary DSLR. Not inherently better, but similarly good, for the way I shoot. And yes, this is all about me.

It’s such a truism that I’m sure I’ve said it before: having a camera you know will give you the results you want can be an inspiration. The X-T2 is not cheap, by any means. Even as an occasional video shooter, I’d also need to shell-out for the battery grip, so the costs would add up pretty quickly. But, if I had to put my hand in my pocket and buy one camera tomorrow, this would be it.

And, as we enter the last week of our loan period, the X-T2 is the camera I’m least looking forward to shipping back. I’ll miss it, and I'll miss the encouragement that it’s given me. Merry bloody Christmas.

Bought this camera as second point and shoot camera next to Sony A7RII. It's a nice camera but the output of the Sony, if correctly pre-processed, blows the Fuji away. The dr is much thinner on the Fuji. Highlights are bleached out with high contrast and can not be recovered in lightroom. Viewfinder of the Fuji is a little tiny and difficult to see if images are underexposured or not in default settings.Focuspoint joystick is great even as the film presets.Overall a nice camera but not a competitor for a full frame.

Okay I like Fuji glasses (for APS system) but X-T2 for gear of the year? Seriously?

This one is more expensive than many FF DSLRS, including D750 which has pro built and AF - Isn't removing the flapping mirror and pentaprism supposed to LOWER the price? And where is IBIS just every other system has now?

For comparison, sony a7m2 is now $1500 - with FF sensor and IBIS. How can anyone justify that X-T2 is more expensive than a7m2? ANYONE?

I don't think the price is justifiable in any way if you're looking at it purely from a sensor size comparison. Gear of the year is always a personal opinion based on user experience. All your points are correct, but as someone who has a Nikon D750 and previously owned a Sony a6000, I would rather bring out my Fuji X-Pro 1 when I'm shooting casually because it's a nice camera to use.

It doesn't mean I disagree with you. The X-Pro 2 costs more than my Nikon, and as you rightly said, has no IBIS and is only APS-C sized sensor. But having handled one, I know I'd like one if I can afford it more than any other camera because it fits what I want in a camera.

In my opinion you have also to consider the price of the lenses. I'm pretty sure that if you own multiple pro glasses for Sony or Nikon, you will not be attracted by this camera as its price is not as affordable as other unarguably valuable cameras of those manufacturers, given the fact that you have to buy also some lenses with it.But if you decide to switch, you will own a pretty darn good camera with excellent optics that will cost a fraction of (almost) correspondent Nikon/Sony glasses. What I'm saying is that you make an economic effort once for all. With Nikon (and above all, Sony) economic efforts prohibitive for most have to be made every single time you're buying a glass.I'm planning to do the switch from Nikon to a X-T(or PRO)2 mainly because of what I've said and because of the saving of gear size/weight.Happy to hear your thoughts about that!

Regarding the IBIS. I was very disappointed too because of the lack of it in Fuji's X-System.But on a gear with those ergonomics and weight... do you REALLY REALLY need it? We are talking about a camera half the weight and a fraction of the size of a normal DSLR with a prime attached.Also, every zoom lens (even the kit one) is stabilized. So where is the big deal?

I actually boughtbthe Fuji X-Pro2 after reading the review. I sold it at a loss after the 3 months. I haven't bought this as a replacement. The hybrid viewfinder did not work for me.. the pro2 being my third Fuji X model, I also found the usability of the dials much below expectations. They did not lock properly on many occasions etc. and MF assist only work in some lighting conditions. I will wait until I can geht this T2 as a rental to test it myself. If it weren't for the lenses I would have dropped the whole system

I'm sorry to hear about your experience with the X-Pro2. We try to write reviews to allow people to make informed decisions but there are some things (such as Fujifilm's hybrid viewfinder) where no amount of description is as valuable as being able to try it.

I'd be interested to hear about your experiences with MF Assist not working. Drop me a personal message if you want to discuss it.

You have tried three Fuji X models and you keep coming back for more? The upgraded models look great with some great new features and improved performance but Fuji isn't reinventing the wheel. Seems like if you aren't feeling it after three Fuji X models the chances of the 4th being the charm are pretty slim although at least you'll have more to complain about and you could blame dpr for you buying the XT2....

Hi guys, did not mean to blame anyone but myself. I went to the shop and bought it myself after all. Sorry if that came out all wrong.What got me commenting was that @Richard chose this product out of enjoyment of using it. I can relate to that, thus I try and wrestle with the viewfinder vs af/Mf time and again. If it works out the results are beautiful. Sr.y again, Shutting up now. ;)

I can fully respect that...I happen to own the x pro 2 and love it to death. It makes me want to take pictures. It has the autofocus upgrades of the xt2 now via fuji's nice policiy on firmware support... It is a very personal choice - what I like to know is that if I were to ever want to go to the "slr" body style, my lenses are a safe investment. Cannot say that with a lot of companies.... I love the glass and the feel. I hope you find a camera that makes you happy and gets you out the door.

Richard, your review helped me a lot on the xpro2 and keep things the way they are please. You do great work.

I feel pretty much the same about my Sony A7RII (even if it is not the smaller and lighter ML camera out there). Now I've sold most of my DSLR gear (I'm a former Canon and Nikon shooter) and I'm having a lot of fun with the Sony native lenses I have and, even more, with the wonderful legacy lenses I can attach to this gem of a camera.

I was big on upgrading from Canon to Sony A7R II until I realized mirrorless is actually heavier than a DSLR for my needs. The Sony A99 II DSLR plus a Zeiss 50/1.4 (A Mount) plus a Zeiss 135/1.8 ZA weighs LESS than a Sony A7R II plus a Zeiss 50/1.4 (E Mount) plus a Zeiss 135/1.8 ZA plus an A-to-E mount adapter.

The physical body of the A7R II is 225g lighter than the A99 II, but equivalent mirrorless lenses are either heavier, non-existant, or need an adapter. The Zeiss 50/1.4 (E) alone weighs 260g more than the Zeiss 50/1.4 (A). There is no 135/1.8 or even 135/2 for the E Mount, so using the same A Mount version requires a heavy adapter on which it does not autofocus nearly as quickly.

I love Sony, but the E Mount system is not any lighter than A Mount after you add at least two top-quality lenses. They are all going to be very heavy for E Mount (and the new G Master 85/1.4 is no exception). Any Canon, Nikon, or in my case (soon) Sony DSLR system will be just as light in most cases.

I agree with this article and the camera that want to make to "get out and shoot" philosophy. I feel the same way about my new E-M1 Mark II acquisition. The only reason I didn't choose the X-T2 is the poor video and the funky Fuji menu system. Oh, and the fact that I have about 35 Panasonic and Olympus Micro Four-Thirds lenses. :)

Really nice article, Richard. I also very much enjoyed the video of your cycling gang, and it made me quite envious; I need to get out and ride, too! (I *love* bicycling...)

What resonated most with me about your article was the fact that the X-T2 just made you want to "get out and shoot". If's interesting that you put it that way, because that is EXACTLY what I have loved about the Fuji X system, ever since I bought my X-Pro1 almost four years ago to the day. After a decade of shooting a LOT of pro motorsports with Canon pro gear, I was jaded, tired and literally worn out, physically. What I love most about the Fuji X system is they brought the joy of photography back for me. And that is...priceless.

What I was most impressed with when I rented the camera was the wonderful native APS-C lens selection. And the kit lens, the 18-55 f/2.8-4.0, was a delight in comparison with the lesser quality kit lenses for other systems. But those lenses certainly aren't inexpensive. :(

And yes, even being a diehard Nikonite, its shooting experience was most enjoyable. I concur with everything Richard said above.

Love this camera and the results. I've read too many questionable posts about what it doesn't do, often by people that have never used the camera. So nice to hear Richard talk about what it does do - it makes you want to shoot and have fun. I'm not having IQ issues, focusing issues, aperture issues, crashing issues - and on and on. I'm having more fun with the X-T2 than any other camera I've owned or used - and that's 42 years worth of cameras/formats.

I recently went all-in with the Fujifilm system by purchasing the X-T2, and 23 f/1.4, 16-55 f/2.8, 50-140 f/2.8 and 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 lenses. I'm an amateur/hobbyist and Fujifilm is satisfying all of my needs...sports, landscapes, street and video. The IQ and shooting experience of the Fujifilm system is excellent and I absolutely love it! So much that I'm going to also purchase the 10-24 f/4 lens and either the upcoming X-T20 or X100F as a back up body.

I have transitioned from Canon FF to Fuji gear over the last several years. At this point I have most of the Fuji lenses including the ones on your list (except 10-24). The X-T2 and the four lenses you mention are exactly what I would start with if I had to start over from scratch. Enjoy!

Excellent points and I enjoyed the writeup. A camera is a highly personal choice. I've swapped through a great number of systems (not bragging), trying to find what worked *for me*, and stopped at Fuji (third try is a charm!).

I had previously owned the XE1 and XT1, thought I was unhappy with them, then got back into Fuji (after being frustrated with how the A7 II operated) with the XT10 and remembered how fun it was to shoot.

Once I got my hands on the XT2, it was game over -- I've found the system I'm sticking with until 'the end' -- technically capable and fun to use.

Not that my prior systems (A7II or EM1, 5D3, etc.) weren't technically capable (really, they all are), but when it came to *wanting* to use the system, Fuji is tops in my book.

I would have to agree...for an extra $100, you can get the FF D750...I had the XT-1 for about a year...sold the entire system and went back to FF. Reasons: poor and unreliable battery life and random crashes...unfortunately, the random crashes also plagues the XT-2 (see YouTube XT-2 reviews).

The difference between apsc and ff is one freaking stop. ONE!! That is imperceptible in almost all cases. The image quality is good enough for anything in the world. I don't care who you are, what you do, or what your standards are, this camera produces quality good enough for your job or hobby. Anything else is icing and some people don't care about extra icing on their cake.

Ergonomics, evf, are both personal (i find the ovf's on every ff dslr to be completely useless. My film slr's are much better by comparison and an evf is infinitely better than ANY ovf).

Troll troll troll all you want. Nobody cares about your opinion, no one cares about you. Go away you sad and pathetic little gnome.

Don't feed the troll, sure ! But you are a good one too claming OVF is useless...

I can tell you EVF is useless for me, as the rear screen in a highly sunny country! EVF got so choppy and ugly in lowlight scene ! Theses devices are battery hungry as hell, and so on ! So what ?

EVF is a good tool for some shooters, OVF does the same for other. Why the hell so much fever to terminate OVF ? Your eyes are too old for OVF ? Get the EVF device that suit your needs. it isn't a Nikon ? wait till they find a usable one way to build a Nikon version of EVF body !

In the meantime, I just go out with my OVF cameras and take photos (even my old 2002 S2pro is still going out in my 7yrs daughter hands and it still makes nice enough pics whereas it is absolutly "obsolete" technology ).

I said that I find OVF's to be useless. I never said that there were for everyone. So your entire spill is pointless....I also specified that the ovf's on ff DSLR's are useless. The ovf's on my various SLR's are still very useful (although I still prefer a good evf). The ovf's on todays slr's pale in comparison to film cameras.

Any good evf won't get choppy in lowlight, they should automatically apply gain or adjust their brightness to match the actual exposure settings. Try an olympus evf to see a good one. I have never had my em5 mark II become anything resembling choppy in lowlight (a large portion of my shooting occurs in lowlight with fully manual lenses)

"(i find the ovf's on every ff dslr to be completely useless)"Of course, it is your opinion. Just YOURS !

So your comments are not less pointless than mines.

Oh, and never look in a Varicam EVF, you will revised your opinion on the Oly EVF, but ok, it's not the same class of device. It just show the long path mirroless cams have to achieve to be pro grade devices, even if pro are using mirroless ILC (some of them already use PoS devices and make beautiful pics with obsolete tech).

please, remain: EVF created not for us, but for reduce the cost of camera, and its very funny when some people beginning to like it... Very funny! Open your eyes, please! They reduced camera cost but increase the price! See please, some toy cameras with microscopic matrix (4/3...) now you must buy in even twice price then really camera Nikon D610 or Canon 6D. I meant just this, not, oooh, quality is enough for somebody. see to price and to lie! LIE! That cameras must cost under 500 or 400 USD, but not 1700 or 2000, that lenses must cost under 300 or 200 USD but not 1000 or 2000... I talk about it... And please, don't say 4/3 cameras working as full frame...

Having been a Professional photographer since 1977 I can only confirm all of the above. Once I went digital after a lifetime of film I only about 12 years ago I got literally 'lost' , went from one brand to the other never 'found it'. In comparison: I owned three Nikon F3 cameras for about 20 years because they were just perfect to use. Never missed a beat. Then came all those digital 'arcade game machines' loaded with more buttons as my car has. End now Fujifilm nailed it - I got that Nikon F3 feel again. :-)

Look of Sony native (even Sigma) APS-C lenses is a weak point of the system (not the only one). I wouldn’t mind using word ugly sometimes. Fujinon lenses are generally nice in comparison and as I say it’s not just nitpicking but quite a contrast. And of course this matters.

On the contrary Richard, because all current cameras are supremely capable and the automatic features people complain about didn't even exist for most of the history of photography, choosing a camera because it's fun to use makes complete sense.

I tell people who are looking at the better, more expensive cameras, forget about the test reports--they are for fans. I ask 2 questions. (1) Is it fun to use and (2) how fast and reliable is the repair service, if needed.

I thought that RB cannot live without a touch-screen. The X-T2 is cool, but its video AF hunts like crazy. No GPS, Fujifilm WiFi is a joke. Cannot even come close to M5 or A6500 for video C-AF. The missing touch screen was really a deal breaker to me. I still keeping my X-A1 and not upgrading, though. In camera film simulation is pretty cool for JPG shooters, sure; but I prefer my film cameras for film simulation. I have a Df, too, and I'd prefer the Df for retro-digital since it is full frame and much better to give back the old style shooting experience. On the other hand, I completely understand RB, you could fell in love with a camera like this without any meaningful reasons, very true, it's so cool.

I find the Fuji Wi-Fi faultless on both iPhone 7 Plus and 12" iPad Pro. If I need to transfer many large movies though I pull out the lightning USB 3 SDcard reader and zap them in quickly. Greatly superior to Wifey's Canon Wi-Fi and our Eye-Fi cards. Sure, it could be better...App also sends GPS local to the camera. I'd rather do that every so often than running the camera flat trying to get a GPS lock without SIM card cell tower triangulation.

As said it does work for me without blocking issue. It is not optimal, but reliable. IPhone 6s and iPad Air 2. I transfer images occasionally via wifi and to speed that up, I dedicated the top function button of the xt2 to the wifi connection..

Fujifilm X-T2 -- Gear of the Year? It's like an April fools' day in the middle of the winter.No, really, if I didn't use any of Fuji cameras I would have believed this hilarious review. But I did use almost every Fuji, and they all fall short in image quality department. If you want the best Fuji files, buy their Bayer CFA models (X-A1/2/3). The x-trans have serious problems with colors. The OOC jpegs are pretty poor, but that's a small problem. Jpegs from all cameras are relatively poor, so if you value your pictures you would use raw anyway. And that's the biggest Fuji problem. The popular RAW converters (Adobe, Iridient, C1) produce awful colors, very bad color separation, and no micro-contrast to talk about. When you compare it to Canon/Sony (my favorite cameras) then you immediately notice how dull Fuji images are. And don't forget the worms in the landscapes, and plastic looking skin -- yikes! The PhotoNinja and RawTherapee do a better demosaicing job, but fail in other respects

jonny1976. I really admire the Pentax K-1 and, if my personal style of shooting were different, that might have been my choice. As someone who used to shoot a Pentax SLR, I love the fact that K-mount owners finally have a genuinely competitive full frame camera. However, these articles are specifically and explicitly personal.

We've not yet had access to fully working Hasselblad or Fujifilm medium format cameras, so it's too early for me to even consider those.

I disagree with Carl Mucks' comments about the x trans and the SOOC jpegs. Don't know if he has used the camera but assume he hasn't If Carl or anyone wants to see excellent SOOC work, go to Kevin Mullins' site, http://f16.click

If you want to see what the x trans can do color-wise, go either to Kevin's site listed above or Jonas Rask's site, https://jonasraskphotography.com.

I think we all need to learn to work with a camera before we spout negative statements about its image quality. I love shooting with this camera and learn something new about it every time I go out with it.

by the way i love this camera and fuji system...my x100 is till my workhorse for syncing flash over 1/1000....in my opinion the title is a bit misleading and sound not like a personal choice but an absolute one

@ Carl, you are a funny man, do you do comedy for a living? :)Anyway. Fuji has best colors of all cameras. Better of Canons, and faar faaaar ahead of any Sony (Sony? really you think Sony colors are good?) And why do you think other software falls short of lightroom? I have used them all. Currently use rawtherapee and dont think lightroom has much edge over it. I can do better shadow pulls in lightroom, but that's about it. rawtherapee is stronger in other compartments.

Disagree. I dislike the Canon look now. Which is a pity because I love the 100mm 2.8 IS we have. Besides, Gear of the year for Richard was what he had the most fun with. Having transitioned to Fuji from Canon over the last few years I personally agree, at least for me. If gear of the year was purely Max IQ — which it isn't — we'd have a medium format winner with slow burst rates, limited lens selection, handling penalties and other compromises. I've taken some awesome portrait shots from my 56mm 1.2 on the X-T1. Beautiful skin tones.

Too bad Fuji has no 5-axis IBIS. All my cameras moving forward need to have in-camera stabilization! Plus for those in the camp of of those who claim they don't need IBIS...good in-camera stabilization ascends non-stabilized cameras any day!

I also do not understand why cameras do not offer IBIS. This would make all lenses smaller and cheaper! If any technical advantage exists for some types of lenses: go ahead and have these lenses add in-lens stablization which automatically switches off IBIS.

I suck at selling gear privately too...hence I part exchange,,but you never really get a great deal doing so...Had a pair of Swarovski binoculars and was given £600 for them (wouldn't give me more). I later found out they were on sale for £1200!! ....just £200 less than I paid for them!!My fault for looking after my gear...

These Gear of the Year pieces are so much better than the site's normal reviews; no bloviating about camera design, no sophomoric conjecture about imaging science, just heartfelt opinion. You've conveyed more useful information in just a few paragraphs than the regular reviews say in their thousands of ponderous words. All reviews should be like this.

Thinking out loud: The general public thinks that as soon as numbers are published they MUST BE TRUE and its the only truth. Other people might be happy to interpret an opinion. To do this it is best to know what this person likes in general (is it the same type of things that he/she likes as one likes oneself). Also it is good to know if this person is additional biased by some aspect such as personal advantage by expressing a like for a specific item and/or brand. Since amazon has taken ownership of this site I am somewhat uncertain in what way they would potentially influence reports. In the most optimistic view amazon would focus on newer=better and expensive=better. The latter would give a bonus for Fuji because of the price of lenses. They are good and in most cases worth the price, BUT there are no low price and less good alternatives on the market. In some cases the price is just huge: look at the "regular" price of 14mm/f2.8 and you know what I am talking about.

This camera is already out of stock, so by spreading info about how good it is you are just making matters worse for the rest of us who want to get it. What you really need to do is start spreading propaganda about how bad this camera is so we can minimize the hordes of people from snatching it up and causing an even worse shortage.

fuji101 - Bashing may not be enough, therefore I need you to go to all the camera stores and block all buyers from entering until I arrive so that I can get the camera. Can you do this for me? I'm counting on you.

I have the xt2 and I am very happy to see there is high demand for it. Fuji is a relatively small player, I want them to survive , especially after I jumped from Canon and invested into Fuji system.. camera market is shrinking heavily against phones..

As you probably know there is a growing sense of disappointment with the "frustratingly slow" joystick echoing thru the Fuji online forums. Some users restrict the number of focus points available to deal with this perceived shortcoming. Previously, in comments here below one of your Fuji articles you suggested that a properly implemented touch-screen might be a better way to navigate a sea of 400 focus points. However, while your early criticisms of the "laggy" Sony a6500 touch screen implementation have been "seconded" by almost every review I've seen, I haven't seen any formal reviews criticize the speed of the Fuji joystick. So, I'd appreciate it if you commented about that here. Are you truly as satisfied with the Fuji joystick's utility as the above article implies?

I shouldn't think that the specific touchscreen implementation on the A6500 should imply that it is a poor solution generally. On Panasonic cameras it works flawlessly, and I have heard similar approval of Canon and new Olympus touchscreens as well.

After a few thousand pictures with my X-T2, I can report that the joystick is not only fast enough (definitely), but it really works perfectly, with all AF points. I am happy there is no touch-screen: no changing focus points with my nose, no fingerprints on the screen. To me, touchscreens are perfect for smartphones and p&s without viewfinder, not for serious cameras. The joystick is perfect, better than anyhing I have worked with until today.

I think all the forum comments about joystick speed are a crock and a red herring, to be honest. I find it to be plenty responsive and quick enough for rapid changes in your AF point. It's also nicely placed for other directional and selection functions that you might otherwise use the keypad for. I'm totally with Webber15 and other responders on this one.

I also really enjoyed Richard's writeup and the fact that he emphasized his emotional response to the camera... something the you most often wouldn't see in many formal reviews. That ends up being one of the major advantages that Fuji (and the X-T2 in particular) offers. It just makes you smile.

Richard, I agree (though I own the XT10). I feel Fuji is making photography fun again. I have been through so many brands over the last few years having owned a Sony A7II, Canon 6D, and Olympus EM5II. I can tell you that every system I have used has been very capable, but no system I have used has been as enjoyable as Fuji. In my 20 some odd years of shooting I have never experienced such lovely color science from a camera, it's truly astonishing - I think Fuji can make the most boring subject matter into art with little to no effort. And the lenses are gems, even the cheap 35 F2 is remarkable beating IMHO some of the best L glass I have owned over the years. Fuji is about the photographer, no it won't appeal to gear heads looking for a long specification list, but for anyone who is all about procsss of making art Fuji is really unmatched IMHO at delivering a very intimate experience.

An earthquake has disrupted the production line of the sensors in many Fuji cameras. It does not help that at the same time Fuji cameras are becoming increasingly popular. The camera does exist, don't you worry.

Troll Mucks... Sony handles like a dog, no comparison there mate, I can't think of a single M43 body with worse handling or menu system than any of the A6xxx. Oh, and there's that small issue with native lenses, or lack thereof... and I nearly forgot, colours? even Panasonic has better colours than your Sony appliance, Olympus and Fuji colours? an universe away from what any Sony can produce.

I think biff56 means a faster lens, not the 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 OIS (which is no doubt better than most kit lenses, but arguably not up to the standards of most serious hobbyist lenses). Yes, there's the 18-55mm f/2.8-4 OIS, but to many people the wider end is considerably more useful at 16mm than at 18mm. In another system I switched from an 18-50mm f/2.8 to a 16-50mm f/2.8 in part because I wanted to go wider.

But will including OIS lower the IQ as much as reducing shutter speeds to marginal levels, or pushing the ISO?

You can argue that if you're using it purely for documentary purposes (journalism, wedding photography) then OIS doesn't help since you need to freeze motion. But there are lots of situations where stabilization is valuable.

@darngooddesign:it does lower the optical quality??? how so?I mean check out what Sony's latest Alpha 7 model, or the APS-C a6500 offerings do... or Olympus' OM-D series...I own the OM-D E-M1 ... and honestly it's IBIS doesn't ruin the image quality.Sure it's not a FF Camera or even APS-C - but that is beside the point.And again, Sony does quite well for having IBIS.

@darngooddesignthis is again, completely not true... OIS or IBIS... one of the lenses I use most regularly is my Nikon 24-70 2.8 VR... mostly paired with the D800 or D3...And the 70-200VR... I have owned the non-OIS (VR as nikon calls it) models before those... and honestly, IQ has certainly NOT suffered... and trust me, the D800 would show issues quickly with it's high res sensor.

Just saying - OIS or IBIS does not degrade IQ if done well.The only reason NOT to include it: price tag and another level of complexity in engineering.

And certainly if pushed beyond reasonable levels or use, it will result in "lowered IQ (blur).." but it takes more than it would withoutAlso on Tripods IBIS/OIS can be a funky thing... so that is why it can be switched off.

Spot on.... It is the camera that makes you want to get out and shoot. Yes, all of the pieces did come together on this amazing camera. On top of that, don't forget the amazing Fuji glass that you will attach to this beautiful camera. I shot Nikon and Canon for over 40 years, and I still have my full frame Canon and closet full of L lenses. But Fuji is what I take with me when I head out the door for almost any shoot (especially travel).

I have several thousand XT-2 images posted here if anyone is bored enough to care....

means nothing. People who don't know what they are doing and use Adobe Lightroom might produce some artefacts that look a bit like waterpainting when they oversharpen images a lot. Not really relevant for anyone with a bit of knowledge ;)

There are a lot better program of raw file for the Fujifilm X-Trans than Lightroom. For since then Dpreview only use one software which is Adobe, thats it. It does not help with the review at all, pretty much pathetic to me.

I am not sure what the OP wanted to say, but: Bayer is the de-facto standard. That means tart SW-developers will work for Bayer and not for X-trans. If Fuji really thinks that X-trans is a better starting point for creating RGB raster images then they should develop top-notch software for inclusion into tools such as Lightroom and other workflow related tools with a need for good image processing. This should come free for the integrators to make a case for Fuji/X-Trans. Why on earth does Fuji stubbornly stick with X-Trans yet not give Adobe and others access too free top-notch "de-x-transing" libraries. Plus: the latter better be fast; processing X-Trans with Lightroom, is sloooooooow!

I really like the X-T2 too and had I not already invested myself well into the Micro 43 system I would happily had bought Fujis camera. Now I´ll have to settle for the EM1-MkII instead. I simply can not see myself giving up the IBIS and my lenses are great. But darn it if the Fuji X-T2 isnt just a little more sexy to just hold...

Fuji users are using software that is giving great results for x-trans. why should they use lightroom? there are some great programs out there that are even free, like rawtherapee. give those software a try.

@Hellraiser "why should they use Lightroom?"1. Excellent interface, tools and workflow. No, *really* excellent.2. Hundreds of $$$ already invested in superb LR presets.3. Robust cataloging, keywording, metadata sorting, etc.4. Lots of customization options.5. Super speedy shortcuts via VSCO Keys.6. Works great with all of my other cameras.Other than that, not much reason to use LR. :)

@Yake1. Used LR extensively, i dont find its user interface to be ahead of competition2. Who invested in presets? Dont know a lot of Fuji users who invest heavily in LR3. There are other cataloging programs that do the same thing, some are even free and not all photographers use catalogs. I find them tiresome and confusing, like to use folders5. VSCO keys are being added to other programs, you know6. Well, dont use Fuji if you are so deeply invested in LR? Or try Rawtherapee.... its a really really really good program (free too)

UPDATED: Fujifilm will launch a couple of major firmware updates for its X-T2 and X-Pro2 cameras. Features on the way include focal length-dependent minimum shutter speed in ISO auto and added tools for video shooters. Read more

For the most part a glittering parade of the utterly unnecessary, CES does occasionally throw up a gem for camera geeks. Last year it was Nikon's D500 and D5, and this year we're very taken with Fujifilm's new 'Graphite' editions of the X-T2 and X-Pro2. Read more

Latest in-depth reviews

The Nikon Z6 may not offer the incredible resolution of its sibling, the Z7, but its 24MP resolution is more than enough for most people, and the money saved can buy a lot of glass. Find out what's new and notable about the Z6 in our First Impressions Review.

Many cameras today include built-in image stabilization systems, but when it comes to video that's still no substitute for a proper camera stabilization rig. The Ronin-S aims to solve that problem for DSLR and mirrorless camera users, and we think DJI has delivered on that promise.

The SiOnyx Aurora is a compact camera designed to shoot stills and video in color under low light conditions, so we put it to the test under the northern lights and against a Nikon D5. It may not be a replacement for a DSLR, but it can complement one well for some uses.

At its core, the Scanza is an easy-to-use multi-format film scanner. It offers a quick and easy way to scan your film negatives and slides into JPEGs, but costs a lot more than similar products without a Kodak label.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

For the past few weeks, our readers have been voting on their favorite photographic gear released in the past year in a wide range of categories. Now that the first round of voting is over, it's time to pick the best overall product of 2018.

Sony had the full-frame mirrorless market to itself for nearly five years, but it's no longer alone – the Nikon Z6 and Canon EOS R have both arrived priced to compete with the a7 III. We take a head to head to head look at these three cameras.

As if it needed one, the triple-camera smartphone might really be the final nail in the compact camera's coffin. DPR contributor Lars Rehm brought the LG V40 on a hiking trip recently and found it to be a huge leap forward in terms of creative freedom.

Renowned UK-based landscape photographer Nigel Danson has been using DSLRs for years. In this video, created exclusively for DPReview, Nigel discusses his experience using the Nikon Z7 and why he's excited about mirrorless cameras. (Spoiler... beautiful scenery ahead.)

Chinese optical manufacturer Kipon has added the Nikon Z and Canon R mounts to its range of adapters made to attach medium format lenses from Hasselblad, Mamiya, Pentax and others to full frame cameras.